There has been a lot of enthusiasm around environmentally friendly construction in recent years. The situation could be described with the business slang expression “good buzz”. The word pair can refer to productive work, but also to the presentation of diligent work. This can result in a spectacular cloud of dust rising into the air, inside which nothing really happens.
There is a lot of good going on in construction from a biodiversity perspective. The debate is brisk, and the different parties – the state, municipalities and companies – all share a common understanding of the challenges and the need for change.
So steps are being taken in the right direction, but the pace still feels slow.
We need housing, roads, energy and telecommunications networks, investments in defense and security of supply, and solutions to adapt to climate change. We do not have the option of stopping construction to save nature.
Instead, we need to build in a way that takes nature into account more than before.
Natural values are not reflected in the rules of construction
In construction projects, the schedule, costs and technical requirements are precisely defined. They bind the parties to the projects here and now, while the benefits of biodiversity are often only visible years and even decades later.
When the client mostly decides the contract competition based on price, it can be difficult to find an economic justification for solutions that improve nature. For example, nature-based stormwater solutions, green networks or restoration measures can increase investment costs, even if they would produce significant benefits for society in the long term.
On the other hand, when discussing the environmental impacts of construction, too much attention is often focused only on construction sites and construction companies.
In fact, the most significant decisions for nature are often made long before a construction project begins. Zoning, land use planning and permitting largely determine where construction takes place and what kind of natural values can be preserved in the area.
The industry needs information about next steps
There are currently a number of construction projects underway that are experimenting with different ways to better take nature into account during construction.
What is needed in the construction industry, however, is a clear plan for what kind of practical nature measures will be required on every construction site, for example, over the next five years.
How is the reduction of environmental impacts taken into account in practice? Will there be new requirements, for example regarding ecological compensation, and in what respect? How is a smaller environmental footprint or, for example, nature-compensated building materials taken into account at the project level?
Do we want change at all, together as a society, or will we leave consideration for nature purely up to individual companies' own responsibility actions?
The debate must lead to decisions
Right now we are still in our comfort zone and discussing the big picture – a better tomorrow on a general level. It does not yet guide companies on a broad front to develop their operations.
Many companies are already investing in new, nature-based solutions. However, they will only really become more widespread when the market rewards their use. Without customer requirements, supportive regulation, functioning markets and long-term policies, change will progress too slowly.
Seminars and speeches can still stir up dust – as long as they also lead to concrete decisions. They can be used to harness the built environment to slow down the loss of nature.
“Companies need clear goals and a market that rewards consideration for nature.”
Write a comment